Skip to content

Conversation

@HansOlsson
Copy link
Contributor

By using different sources for different conversions we make it clear that they are independent and also help unit-checking.

These were the only such obvious unit-issues in the test-suite.

@HansOlsson HansOlsson added the L: ModelicaTest Issue addresses ModelicaTest, ModelicaTestConversion4 or ModelicaTestOverdetermined label Oct 28, 2022
@HansOlsson
Copy link
Contributor Author

(Testing of Modelica.Blocks, I assume library officer for "Test" also can handle "ModelicaTest")

Comment on lines +1389 to +1396
connect(to_litre.u, cosine9.y)
annotation (Line(points={{48,110},{41,110}}, color={0,0,127}));
connect(cosine12.y, to_gps.u)
annotation (Line(points={{41,-10},{48,-10}}, color={0,0,127}));
connect(cosine11.y, to_bar.u)
annotation (Line(points={{41,30},{48,30}}, color={0,0,127}));
connect(cosine10.y, to_kWh.u)
annotation (Line(points={{41,70},{48,70}}, color={0,0,127}));
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Minor comment: Can I please ask for sorting by cosine instance name and having the cosine connector as first argument of the connect statement?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

L: ModelicaTest Issue addresses ModelicaTest, ModelicaTestConversion4 or ModelicaTestOverdetermined

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants